Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
It doesn't really matter how fuzzy the idea is... the resulting price will be the mean interpretation of the concept. So if you say BitOil... without specifying a type of Oil it will probably track an average of all types of Oil unless most people come to the consensus that it should track Brent.
I think the window for getting low price PTS only couple hours on 28th. 3I has controlled almost 2/3 PTS(1M) through AGS /mining and early buy in. so you can not expect 3I can hand off on pts price dropping on and after 28th.Now that everybody seems to think that PTS will drop sharply in value on midnight 28/2 the illiquidity of AGS seems to become secondary.
I expect PTS donations to reach 10-12 k a day quite soon and then level off until the night of nights
To clarify: This would be the case when BTS would decrease in price more than twice compared to the point in time when the short positions was taken (if a short position requires 2x Asset value in BTS)?so i guess this describes the margin call case. How can the system run out of bitshares like mentioned in the OP?
...always thought about that: The BitAsset speculator would have to take into account not only the future price developement of his Asset but also the price developement of BTS. That would not be good for someone that is looking for a simple way to hedge something or an expert in Gold/Oil/whateverAssett who is not also an expert on the future developement of BTS price..not a problem?
DACExchange is a Bitcoin -> DACcoin centralized exchange.
DACIndex is coinmarketcap.com for the DACcoins traded on DACExchange.
7.5 BTC missed the deadline. People never learn
Perhaps people know what they are doing and are playing 'heads I win'.... 'tails, I don't lose'
Guess so. I know at least Delulo has a similar idea.
I am planning on developing DACIndex.com and DACExchange.com so I'd be happy if you want to continue the DAC focus.
DAC stands for Distributed, Autonomous Company
I think what he's saying is that in the case of more than 2x drop of BTS/BitUSD and collateral runs out then the network will print more BTS to buy back BitUSD... this is paid for by BTS holders (remember "create/destroy" and "redistribute" are completely equivalent)To clarify: This would be the case when BTS would rise in price more than twice compared to the point in time when the short positions was taken (if a short position requires 2x Asset value in BTS)?
I thought it was the opposite?
the case where the collateral is insufficient to back the short position and thus the result is unbacked BitUSD in circulation.
So lets focus on ways of protecting rights without violating anyones rights. First rule of protecting someones rights: do no harm. Modern approaches to protecting rights goes something like this... "you were robbed, so lets go rob someone else so we can track down and punish that thief". It would be better to let the thief get away with it than to become a thief yourself. Especially because in 99.9% of all cases, you end up robing more from others in the pursuit of this thief than the thief robbed from you in the first place.Specifically, what kind of robbery do you mean that the states does in the case described?
I must laugh out loud at this claim... the state system systematically violates every possible human right. It kills more people, robs more people, terrorizes more people, than any organized private crime could by several orders of magnitude and does so with the approval of the majority. Why am I more afraid of government than I am of private criminals? At least there is something I can do about private criminals to defend myself.... you are being sarcastic. I always depends on the perspective. I agree that what you said is a valid perspective. BUT IT IS ONLY ONE AND A VERY ONESIDED PERSPECTIVE. It is so hard to find people that look at things from different perspectives and acknoledge them all. It is calmming for anyones mind to not have ambiguities. It makes things easier. But it is not realistic and sometimes harmful. Humans biggest desire is to lower their fear and therefore try to build a consistent word perception system. Shortcuts (no ambiguities) are easy but not realistic.
Now I have no interest in starting a debate about who is being ideological or closed minded, so please don't take anything I have said personally. I am arguing with the ideas, not with you as a person.Dont worry I dont take anything in a bad way
This single statement implies some assumptions I reject. By saying it cannot be solved by a market you imply it must be solved by force. As such you have given up looking for market solutions and accepted the shortcut of force.... that the end (solving the free rider problem) justifies the means (government force).I would like to be proved wrong because the state solution is faulty! The prevailing soultion is to have an agreement of as many people as possible (on questions like taxes (yes, no, how) etc.). And you are rigth there is force (mostly the thread of force) applied to those that dont agree. Most states exclude some unalienable rights from these agreements. But, and I think you agree, the process can be faulty (what is unalienable? Also the definitions of these unalienable rights can be bent) and with the non-unalienable rights rarely all will agree.
...LET THIS MOVEMENT BE DIFFERENT! No ideologies, only means to ends/goals...
Note that this is itself an ideology, and as bytemaster suggests, a very dangerous one. It's also incomplete. What ideology defines these ends/goals that apparently we're pursuing without regard to costs?
